Gay Marriage and Adoption: Rescuing Absurdity from Itself

Back in the fall, I received an email from one of our visitors challenging my article Gay Marriage: What Marriage? and especially my statement that "it can be shown that the optimum home for children is one where there is a father and a mother." I referred him to a number of places on this site (and one elsewhere) when I bloviate on the subject of gay marriage.

Well, he finally responded to me as follows (I will reproduce it fully, as he refrains from bad language:)

Thanks for the references to the well-designed and objective studies on the children of gay parents; they’ve opened my eyes, and convinced me that hack-job research by such partisan institutions as The American Academy of Pediatrics <http://www.aap.org/> — which makes such outrageous statements as, "the research has been remarkably consistent in showing that lesbian and gay parents are every bit as fit and capable as heterosexual parents, and their children are as psychologically healthy and well-adjusted as children reared by heterosexual parents." <http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-surrogacyside1xoct30,0,1727418.story?coll=la-home-headlines> — is pure pablum. You’re a shining beacon of truth and rationalism in a world-gone-gay.

I share your concern for the welfare of children. I worry, however, that your rationalism isn’t going to gain much traction with the gay-loving U.S. society. But I think I may have found a back door — forgive the pun — to helping the children to an even greater extent than preventing gay people from raising children.

Negro parents.

You see, I’ve found that there are many good arguments to maintain marriage as a union of one white man and one white woman. Research shows that the children of negro parents don’t fare nearly as well — economically, educationally, or getting arrestedinally — as the children of white parents. And here’s the beauty of it: there are relatively few gay parents, so even if you abandon the noble-but-difficult cause of keeping gays from raising children, you’re only dooming a relative handful of kids. But there are tons of negro parents. Tons. The number of kids that need saving from negro parenting is literally in the millions.

How can we team up to get this initiative off of the ground? You’ve apparently got a framework already in place; all it needs is a slight shifting of focus to help millions of kids, rather than the thousands that stand to benefit from not having gay parents. I think I’ve got some good ideas that I’d like to brainstorm with you. Please get back to me and let me know what we can do.

This one’s for the kids! Let’s roll.

P.S. This is in the preliminary stages, but I’ve also begun to look into the detrimental effects of low-income parenting as well, and I think you’ll find the numbers pretty darn interesting…

Needless to say, this is as absurd as it is offensive. But even at that some comments must be made:

The one thing I agree with is that "your rationalism isn’t going to gain much traction with the gay-loving U.S. society." It generally doesn’t. I am pleased that the left-wing community, filled with secularlists who keep telling us that religious people are incapable of rational thought, has at least one person who considers me a rationalist.

With satire like this, it’s little wonder that many black people resent the whole concept of gay rights.

His addition of low income people finally tipped his hand. One reason why people might seem to do better in GLBT homes is that same homes are generally upper income places, as I noted in Protecting the Master Race. If you took into consideration the income disparity, you would doubtless get a different result. But GLBT people don’t want to do that, because it would seriously reduce the sympathy that they might generated for themselves. (Just ask Paris Hilton!)

I still can’t understand how a group of people who routinely describe themselves as "alternative" is so fixed on gay marriage and gay adoption. It’s just too bourgeois! (I still don’t have an answer to that.)